Appendix The new chronology of Fomenko-Nosovsky and the fight against it First of all - about the very term "New Chronology of Fomenko-Nosovsky". He may seem indiscreet. But the point is this. In 1995, in the title of the book “New Chronology and Concept ancient history Russia, England

Falsifier of science Anatoly Fomenko

The conference with Academician Anatoly Fomenko was also attended by the columnist of the "Week" Petr Obraztsov. We publish part of the academician's conversation with our browser, as well as with Internet readers.

"There was no Masonic conspiracy"

Peter Obraztsov's question: You have repeatedly said that "traditional" historians do not agree to accept your point of view because they are slaves of tradition. And who was at the heart of that false dating of historical events in in large numbers countries and states? What is this mysterious Masonic organization that needed to distort history?

answer: Let's start with the fact that not all historians are against our research, many support us. We have developed a good relationship with archaeologists, with historians, they bring us interesting materials, we do not work in a vacuum.

Regarding the conspiracy: apparently, there was no Masonic conspiracy, but there was the following. According to our hypothesis, until the 18th century, there was a certain single large empire, it split, and independent states arose on this territory, and the new rulers needed new story. They wrote it.
One of the methods of justifying their rights to the throne was the statement that they had always been on this earth and ruled. It was necessary to create some kind of ancient history, they "ancientized" the dates, and so, apparently, an artificially stretched history arose. Work was done to change the dates by several specialists. This work is quite serious, but not like a conspiracy.

in (reader Olga): Dear Anatoly Timofeevich, what mathematical, historical, astronomical data is your theory based on?

O: I refer you to our website chronologia.org, where the book "The Foundation of History" and "Methods" are posted, the full text with figures, the methods, justifications, and processing of texts are fully detailed, on the basis of which we calculate the dates.

Here, let's say, an important way of the last few years of our work is the dating of old descriptions of eclipses and horoscopes, and the location of the constellations and planets is known. I will list the dates so that you can see how much needs to be changed in our ideas about antiquity. We know the zodiac of Pharaoh Seti, Ancient Egypt. With an unbiased dating of this zodiac, it turns out 969 AD ... Zodiac of Pharaoh Ramses IV, Ancient Egypt - 1146 AD ... Zodiac from the Louvre, Europe, XVII century; The gem of Marcus Aurelius, the famous antique gem, exhibited in the Louvre - 17th century AD...

in (Olga): That is, it says that in general the whole story ... it ...

O: Was shorter. Apparently it was much shorter. This must be clarified using the methods of statistics, astronomy, physics, and chemistry. This is what, in our opinion, is very valuable and interesting for specialists in the field of chronology.

In search of the site of the Battle of Kulikovo

in (Samples): Your assumption that the Battle of Kulikovo was not at all where traditional historians believe, but in Moscow, in the Taganka region, in particular, is based on the fact that no material evidence of this battle has yet been found. But recently they found something - bones, weapon parts...

O: Our reconstruction of the site of the Battle of Kulikovo is by no means based on whether there are remains of burials. This conclusion was made by us on the basis of a study of dating, on the basis of an analysis of texts. We do not at all rely on the fact that there are no burials near Tula. I will say even more: if traces of graves or weapons were found there, this does not affect our reconstruction in any way, since historians will have to prove that the remains found there belong to the soldiers of the Kulikovo battle.

in (Samples): The classical method of radiocarbon analysis is known. I know that you criticize it, but this method is well developed by chemists and physicists. They, and not historians, consider the dating according to this method to be basically correct ...

O: In short, the answer is this: the method itself, apparently, is quite interesting from the point of view of physics. However, it is necessary to separate the method from its use in archeology. It is known to all specialists: the accuracy of this method is very low. So far, when dating objects whose age is one to one and a half thousand years, the method has errors of precisely one and a half or a thousand years.

Since the time of the archaeologist Milovich, it has been found out that with an unbiased dating, when a sample is sent to several laboratories without announcing the approximate age of the find in advance, the laboratories give very different answers. In the examples reported by Milovich, the dates differ by 500 thousand years (!).

Take the case where the sample was dated more or less accurately. This is a famous example with the shroud of Christ in Turin, it was dated, and what happened? It turned out that this shroud is by no means dated to the 1st century AD, as many would like. e., and in the interval from the XI to the XIII century AD. There was a scandal, talk of forgery began. Here is a vivid example for you, when a method, applied carefully, gives a date that absolutely does not fit into the scheme.

Our response to "Anti-Fomenko"

in (Irina): In your books, you have already changed the applicant for the role of Jesus Christ three times. So who is he - Isa Christopher, Pope Gregory VII or Andronicus Komnenos?

O: No, we did not have such changes, although we found duplicates of Christ, among them Pope Gregory VII appeared in the first works. The final version presented by us: Christ had many duplicates, we found about 50 reflections of Christ in different texts. The original was, apparently, Emperor Andronicus in the 15th century, he is also known to us as Grand Duke Andrei Bogolyubsky.

in (Andrey Novikov): Why have "new chronologists" still not responded to the criticism set forth in the book "Astronomy Against New Chronology" (2001)?

O: Our zodiac dating program has been published. In the book "Methods" at the end there are large and detailed tables of frequencies, references of names, we have completely published the list, which was the basis for the dating of ancient dynasties. These materials are all published, the algorithm for calculating the coefficients too. To demand from us that we set out hundreds of pages of printouts is not serious.

in (Eugene): It would be very interesting to hear the arguments of professional historians against your ideas and then the counterarguments. Do you have any plans for this kind of "round tables"? And one more question - which of the famous historians (including foreign ones) supports you?

O: Regarding the criticism, I inform you the following: to date, about 10 books have been published under the general name "Anti-Fomenko", those who wish can find them in the central stores of Moscow. Very detailed answers are published in our books, on our website there is a button "Answers to criticism", there is our analysis of statements addressed to us and comments. Therefore, the discussion is ongoing, it is quite accessible.

As for those who support us, I have already said that they exist, but there are still few of them among historians: because of our support, they may experience difficulties in their professional environment.

Our reference. An extra thousand years

Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko is a member of the Academy of Sciences in the Department of Mathematics and is a major specialist in the field of geometry and mathematics, the author of many articles, monographs and textbooks, and a laureate of the State Prize. However, he is known to the general public not as a specialist in an incomprehensible field of mathematics, but as the creator of a "new chronology" with extraordinary conclusions. The essence of the theory is the dating of historical events, which is fundamentally different from the generally accepted one, in which whole centuries (even a millennium) are considered fictional. False, according to the Fomenko group, dating is explained, in particular, by the desire of European monarchs to confirm their rights to the throne and territories with "ancient" historical documents, the desire to demonstrate an impressive "image".

Anatoly Fomenko, often in collaboration with G. Nosovsky, wrote a number of books in which the "new chronology" method was applied to various eras and countries. Among them are "Global chronology", "New chronology and the concept of the ancient history of Russia, England and Rome", "New chronology of Greece", "New chronology of Russia", "Biblical Russia", "New chronology of Egypt", "King of the Slavs", " Beginning of the Horde Rus.

Who became who according to the "new chronology"

Ivan the Terrible became Roman Emperor Diocletian. Or Diocletian and Constantine at the same time;

False Dmitry II - Julian the Apostate;

Genghis Khan - Rurik;

Ivan Kalita - Batu Khan, aka Yaroslav the Wise;

Jesus Christ - Andrei Bogolyubsky;

Charles the Bald - Emperor Theodoric;

Marco Polo - Pole Marik;

Etruscans - Russians;

Russians are Prussians.

Scientific view of Peter Obraztsov

The Etruscans are not extinct. This is you and me

Anatoly Fomenko and his group are not the first to cancel many centuries of history. Their most notable Russian predecessor was Nikolai Morozov, former Narodnaya Volya member, Honorary Academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences, who spent a quarter of a century in the casemates of the Peter and Paul and Shlisselburg fortresses. According to legend, Alexander II considered the death penalty too weak a punishment for a Narodnaya Volya and ordered him to be put to death in prison. The legend is contradicted by information about the actual stay of Nikolai Morozov in prisons, where he could use the library and, upon leaving prison, took out 15,000 (!) Pages of texts written by him.

Among them, a prominent place is occupied by works on historical themes, in which Morozov sharply changes the dating of historical events. Contemporary historians Morozov, as a rule, categorically refused to discuss the delusional, in their opinion, theories of an amateur historian. Yuri Olesha in the book "Not a Day Without a Line" tells how he once mentioned in a conversation with a famous scientist Morozov's reasoning that no Ancient Greece existed and that the Parthenon was built by the Crusaders. "And you are telling me, a historian?!" - the scientist became furious and hit the young Olesha with a cane. At first, the works of Fomenko-Nosovsky evoked approximately the same reaction among historians. They simply considered it below their dignity to discuss this, in their opinion, complete nonsense.

Then the situation changed. The circulation of books on the "new chronology" reached unprecedented levels, the theory of Anatoly Fomenko became a new social phenomenon. And traditional historians set about refuting both individual provisions of the theory and the entire "new chronology". Over time, they were joined by physicists and mathematicians who found errors in the foundation of the theory - the dating of the past according to astronomical events. To date, several conferences on criticism of Fomenko have been held, the Anti-Fomenko website and the Anti-Fomenko book series have appeared.

Attempts are also being made to understand the reasons for the creation of a "new chronology". If you take the point of view of critics, it is really incomprehensible - how could a highly qualified specialist in his field come up with so many ridiculous theories and why? Three hypotheses have been put forward: a) a hoax in the spirit of “lieutenant Kizhe” that has dragged on for 26 years, b) fanaticism and self-hypnosis, unwillingness to abandon the theory once expressed, c) commercial hypothesis a. Only the latter has obvious confirmation - huge circulations of books bring big profits. However, this hypothesis and in society intelligent people shouldn't even be mentioned.

As for the first two hypotheses, they can only be discussed under the "boundary condition" (using the language of mathematics), i.e. with confidence that the "new chronology" is not correct in principle. But no one has proven this yet! At least, he did not prove it in such a way that the "simple reader" would be convinced of this. For each critical remark, the Fomenko group is not too lazy to give a convincing counterargument, and no historian is able to figure out who is right.
What do you think, the reader will ask. So, it seems to me that deriving the identity of the Russians, Prussians and Etruscans on the basis of a successful combination of the letters "r", "y" and "s" in the names of these peoples is about the same as considering bin Laden the son of Ben Gurion.

Everything was not the way it really is.

1. Siege of Troy
Traditional historians agree with Homer that the Greeks fought the Trojans in the 13th century BC.

The Fomenko group believes that Troy, inhabited by Western Europeans, was besieged by the Russians in alliance with the Tatars in the 13th century AD.

2. Battle of Kulikovo
Traditional historians believe that the battle took place on the Kulikovo field in the present-day Tula region in 1380.

The Fomenko group places the battle site in the area of ​​Taganskaya Square in Moscow (on Kulishki), but agrees with the dating of the event.

3. Hagia Sophia in Constantinople (Istanbul)
Traditional historians this Christian temple of the beginning of the VI century AD. that's what they call it.

Fomenko's group identifies St. Sophia with the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, and Constantinople with biblical Jerusalem. The temple itself, according to the Fomenko group, was built 1000 years later, in the 18th century AD.

How did the Germans speak Old Russian?

To contrast with the interview with Academician Fomenko, here are a few statements from professionals. For example, the Fomenko group considers the Radziwill Chronicle of the 15th century to be a falsification. Here is what academician Andrey Zaliznyak says about this: “Let me remind you how the production of the Radziwill Chronicle is carried out in the presentation of the authors of the new chronology. “It was made in Koenigsberg at the beginning of the 18th century, apparently in connection with the arrival of Peter I there and immediately before that arrival". Something was taken from some "really old chronicle of the XV-XVI centuries", and everything that was required according to their plan was composed by themselves. Naturally, the Germans did this. to master the Old Russian language and paleography for such an occasion? True, they didn’t have enough time. And look, it didn’t turn out so badly: for more than two hundred years, not a single linguist has noticed any paleographic, spelling, grammatical, or stylistic falsehood - they didn’t even guess that it came from under the hand of a foreigner!

But the opinion of the doctor of physical and mathematical sciences M.L. Gorodetsky about the historical comparisons of the Fomenko group: "One of the main arguments of the "new chronology" of Academician A.T. Fomenko and his followers is the" method of recognizing duplicates. "coincidences are absolutely incredible from the point of view of mathematical statistics. It is also claimed that there are "several dozen" such pairs of "parallelisms"... Such pairs of dynasties, presented in a visual graphical form, make a strong impression on an unprepared reader.

We will not give numerous proofs of M.L. Gorodetsky about the incorrectness of the approach of Anatoly Fomenko, we will quote only one provision - as it seems to us, quite weighty: "One can also ask the following question: let's say that A.T. Fomenko is still right, and there are several pairs or dozens of pairs of" duplicate dynasties " The question arises: what to do with the simultaneous hundreds of "independent" dynasties in neighboring and distant countries?

With this material, we open a new series of articles by the writer and publicist Yegor Kholmogorov

Ch.I. New Chronology of the "New Chronology"

In Internet discussions, there is the well-known "Godwin's Law" - as the discussion grows, the probability of using the argument "you are Hitler" tends to one. I think it's time to introduce a similar "Law of Fomenkization of Discussions" in Runet.

It is formulated as follows: “As an Internet discussion that uses historical arguments grows, the probability of a commentator appearing with statements “All chronology is incorrect, all manuscripts are fake, all annals are false, proven by scientists, not by liars historians, but by real mathematicians” tends to unit".

Most often, the law is implemented immediately at the beginning of the discussion. Like Voldemort in their name, Fomenkovites immediately fly in wherever the word "history" is mentioned, and the comment about "fake Rome" or "fake Romanov historiography" appears one of the first.

Even teachers at schools and universities sometimes fall into the new chronology and waste the precious time of their students not on acquiring positive knowledge, but on promoting the idea of ​​“forgery of history”.

Fomenkovism has acquired numerous imitations for more refined circles who do not want to eat the “battle of Kulishki”. It is enough to name the texts famous writer and Internet troll Dmitry Galkovsky about the "fake" birch bark letters. Even non-Fomenkovites talk about “fake history” all the time, and the horizon of fake is moving closer and closer, now for some only the 19th century is genuine.

"New Chronology" has become a serious social problem if not to say - a disease. It hinders the dissemination of historical knowledge in society, it quenches interest in the past of Russia and Russians, it prevents the development of a healthy national identity for Russian people based on true history.

It can hardly be deceived that the Fomenkovites accompany this destructive activity with a drumbeat about the fact that Russia, being the Horde, once ruled the world, Yermak conquered America, and the Russian Tsars-Khans were buried in Egypt. The "Empire" fictitious by Nosovsky has no national, civilizational, religious face, it turns into a hodgepodge of peoples, languages ​​and religions. There is nothing Russian in the "Empire" of the Fomenkovites - it is a globalist-postmodernist empire of the present overturned into the past.

Fomenkovism is an intellectual and spiritual disease that needs to be treated. In the series of articles brought to your attention, we will first outline what the key theses of Fomenko-Nosovsky are, then we will trace what stages the “new chronology” has gone through in its development, then we will analyze, using specific examples, the methods of manipulating consciousness used by the Fomenkoites and, finally, we will formulate a systemic response to the challenges of the "new chronology".

Key postulates of the "new chronology"

1. It is argued that there was no antiquity, the idea of ​​​​it was formed in the Renaissance with the help of fakes or by referring the texts of the 16th-17th centuries to a much earlier time.
2. It is argued that our understanding of antiquity is obtained by doubling the characters and historical events of the Renaissance. That is why world history has such an allegedly “unnatural” look: highly developed culture of antiquity - the decline of culture in the Middle Ages - the revival of ancient culture by humanists and imitation (in fact, its creation anew).
3. It is argued that the modern chronology of historical events is incorrect, it was created by two scientists Scaliger and Petavius ​​at the end of the 16th - the middle of the 17th centuries, most likely with malicious intent. According to Fomenko, it is not confirmed by modern astronomical data. A classic example of such a discrepancy is the eclipse described by Thucydides and attributed by traditional chronology to 431 BC, and Fomenko to 1039.
4. Accordingly, it is argued that the history of mankind is much shorter than we think. It begins not earlier than the 11th century, and the historical process that we know acquires modern outlines ... here the data skips, because in order to defend their theory, the Fomenkovites have to declare an increasing section of world history to be false, right up to the end of the 19th century.
5. It is argued that the texts on the basis of which our ideas about antiquity and the Middle Ages are formed are either fakes, some of which were created by Italian humanists in the 15th-16th centuries, or reproduction of duplicates of historical chronicles, rewritten with other names, dates and details. In the newest version of NH, contrary to earlier assertions, it is said that the ancient authors are authentic, but we simply misunderstand their texts, as we are under the spell of the "Scaligerian" chronology.
6. It is argued that the fact of falsification of historical chronicles is allegedly proved by the unique mathematical and statistical model of analysis of narrative texts developed by Fomenko, which shows that “dynastic flows”, that is, the terms of reign and the main events of the life of monarchs in historical chronicles of different times and origins, coincide, which means that before us are the same characters, reflected and duplicated in different chronicles. Thus, the streams of early and late Roman emperors are allegedly identical, where Pompey corresponds to Diocletian, Augustus to Constantine, Caligula to Julian the Apostate. The Palaiologos and Plantagenet dynasties coincide. The Rurikoviches after Alexander Nevsky and the Habsburgs who ruled Germany, etc. coincide.
7. It is argued that the global “falsification” of world history discovered by Fomenko covers up the true facts that formed the basis of its own historical myth, which began to be actively developed from the moment when Gleb Nosovsky joined Fomenko as a co-author. This myth is based on a global conspiracy theory. There was the Great Empire "Rus-Horde", which was ruled by the Russian-Mongolian kings-khans, and the Cossacks were its military class. This empire covered Eurasia, Africa, Ermak-Cortes conquered America for it, its religion was Christianity, based on the veneration of Christ-Andronicus Komnenos, who was killed in Constantinople-Jerusalem, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and so on gradually separated from this religion. In the 16th century, a separatist rebellion in the West began against this empire, now called the Reformation, then the power in the Empire was seized by the insidious Romanovs, who destroyed the memory of the true past, falsified all history and made Russia a colony of the separatist West. The last resistance movements of the imperial soldiers were the Cossack uprisings of Razin and Pugachev. The Western separatists and the Romanovs carried out a total forgery of all history, sending the chronicles of the events of the recent past into the distant past, forging and reprinting all books with false dates. Enemies have formed a myth about the confrontation between Russia and Turkey, Orthodoxy and Islam, in order to prevent the restoration of the Empire. Only fragments of information have survived to us, such as maps on which Russia is designated as "Tartaria", and Fomenko and Nosovsky dig for us these grains of genuine information from under the veil of lies.

New Chronology "New Chronology"

The history of the "New Chronology" went through 4 stages that differ significantly from each other.

1. Nikolay Morozov. 1900-1930s Masonic fantasy.

At this stage, the revolutionary and freemason Nikolai Morozov (1854-1946), who spent 23 years in the Peter and Paul and Shlisselburg fortresses, formulated the general concept of the denial of authenticity. ancient history, based on the subjective interpretation of a number of astronomical data.

Photo: www.globallookpress.com

Morozov stated that the biblical books are zodiacs, that is, a record of the location of the constellations at the time the books were compiled, and began to calculate the dates when exactly such zodiacs could be seen in the sky. All ancient literature Morozov rejected it, saying that it was falsified in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. He was the first to state the thesis that the early Roman emperors were copies of the later ones. The Bible books, however, Morozov considered not a falsification, but an encrypted record of astronomical phenomena, on the basis of which he would transfer them.

In his works “Revelation in Thunder and Storm” and “Christ”, Morozov transferred Christ from the 1st century to the 4th, identified him with St. Basil the Great and declared that he was not crucified, but subjected to “pillars”, and “Apocalypse” was composed by St. John Chrysostom. It is not difficult to see that Christianity was at the forefront of Morozov's blow, and the main thing he wanted to achieve was to discredit the religious faith.

At the same time, in general, Morozov’s constructions are a typical product of the scientistic occultism widespread at the beginning of the 20th century, which was represented by such different figures as the Bolshevik “god-builders” - the red vampire A. Bogdanov and the head of the People’s Commissariat of Education Lunacharsky, the occult decadent Bryusov.

Morozov believed that world history was driven by a secret order of astrologers, and he himself tried to revive alchemy based on Mendeleev's periodic law - to turn one substance into another by changing the composition of the atom. Academician Sergei Ivanovich Vavilov rightly called it "chemical fantasies."

2.Mikhail Postnikov. 1960s-1970s Mathematicians are joking.

Soviet mathematician M.M. Postnikov (1927-2004) became interested in the works of Morozov in the 1960s, willingly read extensive lectures about them, tried to arrange discussions with historians, who, however, avoided these discussions. And not so much because of the wildness of ideas, but because of the amateurish level of their presentation. Postnikov himself quotes the review of Lev Nikolayevich Gumilyov, a man who is quite capable of evaluating fantasy and unorthodox theories: “We, historians, do not meddle in mathematics and ask you, mathematicians, not to meddle in history!”

The main achievements of Postnikov in the field of "new chronology" was the formulation the principle of continuous evolutionary growth of knowledge, which, in his opinion, contradicts the historical failure of the "dark ages", and this, in his opinion, meant that the entire period of brilliant cultural flowering in antiquity was fictional and falsified in the Renaissance, and history began from a low level in III-IV centuries of our era, as Morozov taught.

In addition, Postnikov developed the method of "dynastic flows" - to compare data on the duration and nature of the reigns of representatives of different dynasties of different times in order to isolate duplicate sections. In this way, Postnikov, in his opinion, proved not only that the early Roman Empire was a phantom duplicate of the later one, but also that the Spartan kings were a reflection of the rulers of the late Byzantine Mistra, located in the same place.

The degree of Postnikov's historical competence is extremely low, as he claims the falsity of certain works of ancient authors, but, as a rule, incorrectly, with a late shift, he names the dates of their first printed editions. His intellectual tools are extracts from popular science books on the history of the Soviet publication.

According to Postnikov's lectures, another mathematician, Anatoly Fomenko, got acquainted with the new chronology, and at some point they created a joint group on the “new chronology” with Postnikov, one of their joint texts was even published by Yuri Lotman in the “Works on sign systems” of the University of Tartu, which caused a scandal at the level of the Central Committee of the Party and the Academy of Sciences.

Postnikov compiled his three-volume work "A critical study of the chronology ancient world”, reproduced by INION in 1977 (published by M .: Kraft, Lean, 2000), but he did not get the glory of the discoverer. She all went away to Fomenko, who broke with him.

If Postnikov remained an orthodox Morozovian, starting his alternative history from late antiquity, then Fomenko went for a radical revision of the Morozov concept, starting a new stage in the history of the “new chronology”. At the same time, in Fomenko's publications, one can still find excerpts from Postnikov's work, given, as a rule, without any indication of the source. For example, in a huge compendium on the "new Chronology" - "Rus and Rome: New Chronology. Russian-Horde Empire” (vols. 1-2 M.: AST, 2007) Postnikov not mentioned never.

III. Anatoly Fomenko. 1980s - early 1990s Andronic Shinrikyo sect

Anatoly Fomenko, retaining the foundations of Postnikov's argumentation and methodology, significantly radicalized their conclusions. Not only ancient, but also the entire medieval history was put under demolition. Fomenko stated that he developed methods of statistical analysis of narrative texts, which prove that most of the historical chronicles are corrected duplicates of each other with characters duplicating each other. His "global chronology" claimed to explain the origin of the whole variety of pictures of historical events from only four original chronicles, which were recombined and rewritten, reflected in each other.

Since Fomenko’s works began to appear during the crisis of Soviet historical science with its scholastic Marxist schemes and extreme dullness of presentation, Fomenko’s theory received a warm welcome: firstly, it fit into the big narrative of exposing everything and everyone, which took place under the slogan “they hid from us”, secondly, it was especially warmly received by the “techies”, as it created the illusion that they understood history better than “these lousy humanities”.

And since it was at this moment that the real social default of techies occurred - the institutes and factories of the military-industrial complex were closed, salaries were not paid, then Fomenkovism was one of the forms of ressentiment of this class that suddenly lost its place in society and self-esteem. In fact, it was a form of flight from history, and from reality in general, similar to the spread of rigid totalitarian sects in the same period - the white brotherhood, Aum-Shinrikyo, etc. The very concept of Christ declaring the Byzantine emperor Andronicus Komnenos, a usurper, murderer and pedophile, could not alienate society only in such vaguely ignorant times as the era of perestroika and the early post-Soviet period.

However, Fomenko's problem was that he introduced a predominantly negative, nihilistic content into the "new chronology" - the destruction of the old narrative, framed by many graphics and implicated in the criticism of such an esoteric and incomprehensible text as Claudius Ptolemy's Almagest. The Fomenko region sorely lacked its own positive myth, its own narrative, which appeared with the coming to the fore of Fomenko's constant co-author Gleb Nosovsky.

IV. Gleb Nosovsky. 1995 - present temp. "MMM" folk history

The mathematician Gleb Nosovsky published works on the “new chronology” as early as the 1980s, trying to date the Council of Nicaea and Paschal. Being a parishioner of the Old Believer Church (from which he was excommunicated after the publication of works obviously incompatible with Orthodoxy), he showed a keen interest in religious issues.

His name is associated with the transformation of the "new chronology" from a destructive parahistorical theory into a full-fledged "folk history" with all its elements - a large narrative, folk etymologies of names and titles, revealing secret enemy conspiracies, miraculous transformations of characters, confusion of history and mythology, when in in one stream the Trojan War, the Nibellungenlied and the policy of the Habsburgs are analyzed.

Gradually, this folk-historical content in the "new chronology" is growing - in fact, nihilistic historical criticism is now used only as a prelude to the theory of the "Romanov conspiracy" against Russian history, from under which the authors get us "true facts" that Russia this is both the Horde and Rome, that Ermak and Fernand Cortes are the same person, that the Arab coins found on the territory of Russia are Russian coins.

At its core, Nosovsky's concept is a radical Fomenkized transcription of Lev Gumilev's popular Eurasian concept in the 1980s and 1990s about the organic coexistence of Russia and the Golden Horde, about the Eurasian alliance against the West, etc. Himself prone to historical mythologizing, Gumilyov would certainly have been pretty annoyed to learn that his complex schemes for establishing the closeness and interconnection of Russia and the Horde were replaced by their rough identification to the extent of Baty - this is the “father” ataman, and Dmitry Donskoy is Tokhtamysh.

Monument to Dmitry Donskoy. Photo: Natalia Sidorova / Shutterstock.com

During this period, the "New Chronology" actually turned into a commercial cult, similar to many sects and built on the principle of a "pyramid" - it is necessary to continuously maintain the interest of readers, and for this to come out with new and new revelations, to reveal more and more secrets, to cover all new and new areas. In addition, the increase in the amount of material and absurd statements to an impossible degree makes it possible to almost completely paralyze criticism, since the subject of the dispute is blurred and a single point of reference is lost. What yesterday was a "falsification" today turns out to be a "secret message" in which there are signs of truth that only need to be deciphered. But if any facts are found in this “message” that reveal the falsity of the Fomenkov hypothesis, then these are, of course, late interpolations. Hence the method of actual spam, when Fomenkovism attracts more and more more themes and statements allegedly proving its main theses.

In the Fomenkov concept, a “game for promotion” began in terms of rhetorical flirting with patriotism, they say, only the Fomenkov version of history reveals the true greatness of Russia, and those who disagree with it are participants in a Russophobic conspiracy. The fact that there is no talk of any Russia at all, that Fomenkovism is destroying it, readers stunned by pseudo-Slavophile chatter do not even think about it. This stage, when the "new chronology" exists as an ever-expanding factory of quasi-historical myths, continues to this day.

The followers of the "new chronology", as a rule, are divided into two pronounced types, even if they themselves do not admit it to themselves - into fomenkovites and Nosovites. Representatives of the first type are more interested in the theory of forgery of antiquity, falsity of chronology, skepticism towards historical sources. Most of the epigones of Fomenkovism also, as a rule, take the first, nihilistic position. Representatives of the second type are more interested in the myth of the former great Empire, the search for information about it, encrypted in various sources that have come down to us.

It is important to understand that the Fomenkovskaya and Nosovskaya parts of the New Chronology fundamentally contradict each other both in terms of their general spirit and methodology. One is historical nihilism, the other is historical myth-making.

For example, within the framework of Fomenkov's destructive methodology, it is "obvious" that Herodotus, Josephus, as well as other ancient historians, are a falsification of the Renaissance. At the same time, within the framework of the Nosov historical myth, it is no less “obvious” that Herodotus is a real author who lived in the 16th century, who can serve as a valuable source according to the “Empire” information, if it is correctly interpreted, the problem is not in fake, but in misinterpretation of it by "medieval scholastics". Nosovsky draws information from Joseph Flavius ​​with both hands, for example, he finds a story about Stenka Razin from him.

Within the framework of co-authorship, whose constructions claim to be scientific and true, such opposite models could not coexist. But, since NX is a commercial cult in which the authors are least interested in the truth, most of Fomenko-Nosovsky's publications are a text-centaur, where two contradictory methodologies and historical mythologies live in adjacent chapters. However, due to the higher productivity, the “nosovskaya” part of this centaur is gradually spreading due to the Fomenkovskaya one.

In the next article, we will talk about the methods of manipulating consciousness, up to direct falsifications, used by the authors of the New Chronology to involve adherents in their sect.

On August 12, 2016, a video of the conference dated September 29, 2013 of one of the founding fathers of the "new chronology" G.

When asked about funding, Nosovsky answered the following: "No one finances our projects and no one has ever financed them. If you historians do not have sufficient funding, then we simply have zero." Well, then I read the "moral" for a long time, that counting money in other people's pockets is not good.

But how honest is this answer? To begin with, let's look at such a controversial source as Wikipedia, the article "Fomenko, Anatoly Timofeevich." Nosovsky claims that their first book on the "New Chronology" was published in 1995, and he said so, for the first time (precisely "for the first time") the book was published at the expense of Fomenko's personal funds. But let's see the wiki: " Fomenko A. T., Kalashnikov V. V., Nosovsky G. V. Geometrical and Statistical Methods of Analysis of Star Configurations. Dating Ptolemy's Almagest.- USA: CRC Press, 1993.- 300 pp". The first book on the "New Chronology" was published in 1993 in the USA. Is it really also at the personal expense of Fomenko? This is a 300 page book. It turns out Nosovsky just lied! But let's look at the English-language Wikipedia article about Fomenko and see there: Fomenko A.T. “Some new empirico–statistical methods of dating and the analysis of the present global chronology,” London: The British Library, Department of printed books. cup. 918/87, 1981. As we can see, the "new chronology" has been known in the West since the 80s. So, it turns out that when Fomenko and Nosovsky paint themselves as such donquixotes from science - a pure lie.

And now let's see where the books of Fomenko and Nosovsky were printed in foreign languages ​​abroad: the USA, Great Britain, the Netherlands. Isn't there too much attention in the West to the "New Chronology"? Doesn't this seem strange? If they show me the same attention to other Russian historians or scientists, then I will agree. So, on Wikipedia, the historian A.P. Novoseltsev is mentioned in articles in only three languages, while Fomenko is in 35 languages. It looks like someone is actively promoting the "New Chronology". Is it really the same as Fomenko's personal funds? Who paid for the translation of the books by Fomenko and Nosovsky? who paid for their publication? It is hard for me to believe that the West has suddenly become inflamed with great love for the theory of "new chronology". There are plenty of analogues out there.

And on account of the fact that no one finances the "New Chronology", Nosovsky is just as blatantly lying. This video is from 2013. And here is an article from "Echo of Moscow" dated July 14, 2014:

"In this regard, the conversation turned to the theory of the "new chronology", which is presented by Gleb Nosovsky on "Echo". Deputy Venediktov Sergei Buntman admitted that this character broadcasts on a commercial basis: “There are patrons who pay for his broadcast. This pleased me: I thought, in what form can it be submitted, are there people? who are interested in the new chronology. Thank God, someone took and paid". “And I, for example, believe that the earth stands on three pillars. But I don’t spread my views,” Venediktov put in the word. “And I - that at four. But there was no patron for me,” Buntman picked up.

Note that we are talking about Nosovsky's interview series in 2012-2014, just when Nosovsky impudently lied that no one was financing the "new chronology" project. And here, it turns out, a certain secret sponsor was found who financed a series of programs about Tartaria from Nosovsky. And who is this sponsor and why is Nosovsky hiding his name? And notice with what undisguised irony the leaders of Ekho Moskvy speak about Nosovsky, his theory and his sponsors. It seems that they know this sponsor. And who feeds "Ekho Moskvy" is well known to us.

Thus, I do not believe Mr. Nosovsky and his words about the lack of funding.